> "DD" == Darren Duncan writes:
Some tiny thoughts:
DD> ... I would consider "Numeric" more broad, such as to include
DD> anything that might conceivably be called a number, probably
DD> user-defined, that isn't representable by a "complex".
Is Numeric intended to have a guarantee of commut
On Sat Sep 26 09:23:06 2009, moritz wrote:
> On Mon Sep 21 12:07:15 2009, pmichaud wrote:
> > I agree that the existing behavior is wrong, but what
> > should happen here? Should it report a type mismatch on
> > the invocant when invoking A::foo, or should it complain
> > that A::foo isn't a valid
Darren Duncan wrote:
For the integer version, my understanding is that number theory already
provides a suitable term, "Gaussian integer", which is a complex number
whose real and imaginary parts are both integers.
So I suggest using "Gaussian" as the name option for an "IntComplex".
Or mayb
Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
> Did you consider "discrete"?
I think that "Discrete" could work quite well as the role that
encapsulates the ways in which Integer and Gauss are alike. It may
even be genralizable beyond that, although there might be some discord
between theory and practice. (In theory
Jon Lang wrote:
Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
Did you consider "discrete"?
I think that "Discrete" could work quite well as the role that
encapsulates the ways in which Integer and Gauss are alike. It may
even be genralizable beyond that, although there might be some discord
between theory and pra
Darren Duncan wrote:
> I'm inclined to consider a "Discrete" to be broad enough to include Boolean,
> as well as every single enum type in general; it would also include Order,
> say. So I would also then add a more specific something, say
> "DiscreteNumeric".
There are discrete things that are n
Jon Lang wrote:
Remember also: we're putting together the Perl 6 core here; we need to
show some discretion in terms of what to include vs. what gets "farmed
out" to perl 6 modules. I suspect that gaussian integers belong
firmly in the latter camp; as such, they are germane to discussions
about
At 18:14 -0800 3/14/10, Jon Lang wrote:
>There are discrete things that are not ordered (such as gaussian
>integers), and there are ordered things that are not discrete (such as
>real numbers or strings).
The word discrete as in "atoms are the discrete view of matter" may turn out to
be confusin
